GAO-03-690R DOD Personnel 

United States General Accounting Office 

Washington, DC 20548 

April 18, 2003 

The Honorable Solomon P. Ortiz 

Ranking Minority Member 

Subcommittee on Readiness 

Committee on Armed Services 

House of Representatives 

Subject: DOD Personnel: DOD Comments on GAO’s Report on DOD’s Civilian 

Human Capital Strategic Planning

Dear Mr. Ortiz: 

In response to your request, we issued a report in March 2003 to you on the 

Department of Defense’s (DOD) strategic planning efforts for civilian personnel at 

DOD and selected defense components, including the four military services and two 

defense agencies.1

 In that report we made recommendations to the Secretary of 

Defense to strengthen civilian human capital planning, including integration with 

military personnel and sourcing initiatives.2

 DOD’s response to our March 2003 

report and recommendations were received too late to be included in that report. To 

provide our perspective on DOD’s comments, we briefly summarize our March 2003 

report’s objectives, results, and recommendations and DOD’s comments, along with 

our evaluation of the comments. DOD’s comments provided by the Under Secretary 

for Personnel and Readiness are included as an enclosure to this report. 

Summary of Objectives, 

Results, and Recommendations 

DOD’s civilian employees play key roles in such areas as defense policy, intelligence, 

finance, acquisitions, and weapon systems maintenance. Although downsized 38 

percent between fiscal years 1989 and 2002, this workforce has taken on greater roles 

as a result of DOD’s restructuring and transformation. Responding to congressional 

concerns about the quality and quantity of, and the strategic planning for, the civilian 

 

1

U.S. General Accounting Office, DOD Personnel: DOD Actions Needed to Strengthen Civilian 

Human Capital Strategic Planning and Integration with Military Personnel and Sourcing 

Decisions, GAO-03-475 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 28, 2003). 

2

Sourcing initiatives, which are undertaken to achieve greater operating efficiencies, include such 

efforts as public-private competitions under the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A76 for commercial activities and functions; direct conversions (converting positions from one sector to 

another without public-private competition); public-private partnerships; and privatization, divestiture, 

and reengineering. 
2 GAO-03-690R DOD Personnel

workforce, we determined the following for DOD, the military services, and selected 

defense agencies (the Defense Contract Management Agency and the Defense 

Finance and Accounting Service):3

 (1) the extent of top-level leadership involvement 

in civilian strategic planning; (2) whether elements in civilian strategic plans are 

aligned to the overall mission, focused on results, and based on current and future 

civilian workforce data; and (3) whether civilian and military personnel strategic 

plans or sourcing initiatives were integrated. 

We found that generally civilian personnel issues appear to be an emerging priority 

among top leaders in DOD and the defense components. Although DOD began 

downsizing its civilian workforce more than a decade ago, it did not take action to 

strategically address challenges affecting the civilian workforce until it issued its 

civilian human capital strategic plan in April 2002. Top-level leaders in the Air Force, 

the Marine Corps, the Defense Contract Management Agency, and the Defense 

Finance and Accounting Service have initiated planning efforts and are working in 

partnership with their civilian human capital professionals to develop and implement 

civilian strategic plans; such leadership, however, was increasing in the Army and not 

as evident in the Navy. High-level leadership is critical to directing reforms and 

obtaining resources for successful implementation. Moreover, DOD has not provided 

guidance on how to align the components’ plans with the department-level plan. 

Without this alignment, DOD’s and its components’ planning may lack the focus and 

coordination needed (1) to carry out the Secretary of Defense’s transformation 

initiatives in an effective manner and (2) to mitigate risks of not having human capital 

ready to respond to national security events at home and abroad. 

We also found that the human capital strategic plans we reviewed for the most part 

lacked key elements found in fully developed plans. Most of the civilian human 

capital goals, objectives, and initiatives were not explicitly aligned with the 

overarching missions of the organizations. Consequently, DOD and the components 

cannot be sure that strategic goals are properly focused on mission achievement. 

Also, none of the plans contained results-oriented performance measures to assess 

the impact of their civilian human capital initiatives (i.e., programs, policies, and 

processes). Thus, DOD and the components cannot gauge the extent to which their 

human capital initiatives contribute to achieving their organizations’ mission. Finally, 

the plans did not contain data on the skills and competencies needed to successfully 

accomplish future missions; therefore, DOD and the components risk not being able 

to put the right people, in the right place, and at the right time, which can result in 

diminished accomplishment of the overall defense mission. 

Moreover, the civilian strategic plans did not address how the civilian workforce will 

be integrated with their military counterparts or sourcing initiatives. DOD’s three 

human capital strategic plans—two military and one civilian—were prepared 

separately and were not integrated to form a seamless and comprehensive strategy 

and did not address how DOD plans to link its human capital initiatives with its 

sourcing plans, such as efforts to outsource non-core responsibilities. The 

 

3

Throughout this report, the term “component” refers to all services and agencies in DOD. The term 

“service” refers to the Air Force, the Army, the Marine Corps, and the Navy. The term “agency” refers 

to the Defense Contract Management Agency and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service. 

 
3 GAO-03-690R DOD Personnel

components’ civilian plans acknowledge a need to integrate planning for civilian and 

military personnel—taking into consideration contractors—but have not yet done so. 

Without an integrated strategy, DOD may not effectively and efficiently allocate its 

scarce resources for optimal readiness. 

To improve human capital strategic planning for the DOD civilian workforce, we 

recommended in our March 2003 report that the Secretary of Defense direct the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to undertake the following: 

• Improve future revisions and updates to the DOD departmentwide strategic 

human capital plan by more explicitly aligning with DOD’s overarching mission, 

including results-oriented performance measures, and focusing on future 

workforce needs. To accomplish this, the revisions and updates should be 

developed in collaboration with top DOD and component officials and civilian and 

military human capital leaders. 

• Direct the military services and the defense agencies to align their strategic human 

capital plans with the mission, goals, objectives, and measures included in the 

departmentwide strategic human capital plan and provide guidance to these 

components on this alignment. 

• Define the future civilian workforce, identifying the characteristics (i.e., the skills 

and competencies, number, deployment, etc.) of personnel needed in the context 

of the total force and determine the workforce gaps that need to be addressed 

through human capital initiatives. 

• Assign a high priority to and set a target date for developing a departmentwide 

human capital strategic plan that integrates both military and civilian workforces 

and takes into account contractor roles and sourcing initiatives. 

Agency Comments And Our Evaluation 

DOD’s comments on a draft of the March 2003 report are summarized below and 

reproduced in enclosure I. DOD stated that it appreciated the perspectives provided 

in that report and intended to address the recommendations. Regarding our four 

recommendations, however, DOD concurred with one, partially concurred with 

another, and nonconcurred with two. In its comments, DOD pointed out that its 

strategic planning activities are in the earliest stages of development. We 

acknowledge this and, moreover, note in our March 2003 report that strategic 

planning is a continuous process. Our recommendations to the Secretary of Defense, 

thus, focus on steps the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness 

should take to strengthen DOD’s overall strategic perspective as DOD continues to 

develop planning initiatives for its civilian human capital. 

Our evaluation of DOD’s comments on these recommendations follows: 

DOD concurred with our recommendation to direct the military services and the 

defense agencies to align their strategic human capital plans with the 

departmentwide plan. DOD stated that it is the component’s responsibility to ensure 

that its strategic plan and outcomes dovetail with the departmentwide plan. 
4 GAO-03-690R DOD Personnel

DOD partially concurred with our recommendation to improve future revisions and 

updates to the departmentwide strategic human capital plan by more explicitly 

aligning its elements (including performance measures) with DOD’s overarching 

mission and by focusing the plan more directly on future workforce needs. DOD 

stated the recommendation did not recognize the involvement in and the impact of 

DOD’s Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) on the development of the 

departmentwide plan. As we note in our March 2003 report, the departmentwide 

civilian plan was directed in the QDR and Defense Planning Guidance and by the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness; we also note that such a 

plan had been recommended, as well, in the Defense Science Board 2000 report. Our 

analysis found, however, that the plan did not fully demonstrate alignment with 

DOD’s overall mission in that the plan lacked explicit information about how the 

civilian workforce contributes to accomplishing DOD’s overall mission and how the 

achievement of human capital initiatives will improve DOD’s performance in meeting 

that mission. DOD also noted that the plan contains detailed performance indicators 

and measures that are reported quarterly to OMB. In reviewing these indicators, we 

found, for the most part, they are necessary measures relevant to task 

accomplishment but not oriented to assessing results. In addition, DOD noted that 

the plan recognizes the need for results-oriented performance measures; we believe 

that our recommendation highlights the importance of developing such measures. 

DOD did not concur with our recommendation to define its future civilian personnel 

needs in a total force context, including identifying the workforce gaps that need to 

be addressed through human capital initiatives. DOD stated this action was already 

being accomplished through information provided to OMB and the Office of 

Personnel Management for the President’s Management Agenda Scorecard. We 

recognize that OMB requires workforce information, however, we cannot comment 

on the completeness of the data being supplied because we were not permitted to 

review recent DOD submissions to OMB. Complying with OMB requirements is 

important but does not fully address the intent of our recommendation that is to 

ensure that workforce data, which identify necessary future skill sets and potential 

gaps that might occur in force-shaping, be compiled and analyzed as an integral part 

of the strategic planning process and factored into planning for human capital 

initiatives. As we note in our March 2003 report, this information is highly important 

in targeting the initiatives to address the gaps and to provide the rationale—that is, 

the business case—for obtaining the resources or authorities to carry out initiatives. 

Also, DOD did not concur with our recommendation to assign a high priority to and 

set a target date for developing an integrated departmentwide plan for both military 

and civilian workforces that takes into account contractor roles and sourcing 

initiatives. DOD stated it presently has both a military and civilian plan; the use of 

contractors is just another tool to accomplish the mission, not a separate workforce, 

with separate needs, to manage. The intent of our recommendation (and the one 

above on workforce planning) is that strategic planning for the civilian workforce be 

undertaken in the context of the total force—civilian, military, and contractors—

because the three workforces are expected to perform their responsibilities in a 

seamless manner to accomplish DOD’s mission. Integrated planning could also 

facilitate achieving a goal in the QDR to focus DOD’s resources (personnel) in those 

areas that directly contribute to warfighting and to rely on the private sector for non-
5 GAO-03-690R DOD Personnel

core functions. The need for total force integration has been advocated in the QDR, 

DOD’s response to OMB regarding a restructuring plan, the Defense Science Board 

2000 report, National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) studies, and the 

Commercial Activities Panel report. We believe strategic planning in a total force 

context is especially important because the trend toward greater reliance on 

contractors requires a critical mass of civilian and military personnel with the 

expertise necessary to protect the government’s interest and ensure effective 

oversight of contractors’ work. Workforce planning should be implemented using a 

coordinated and integrated approach to determine the proper roles and mix of 

military, civilian, and contractor employees within the context of mission objectives 

that are essential to national security. 

We continue to believe that our recommendations have merit and will strengthen the 

department’s strategic planning efforts for the civilian as well as the overall 

workforce; consequently, we are not revising them. DOD also provided technical 

comments, which we incorporated, as appropriate, into our March 2003 report. 

Finally, we want to emphasize that we recognize a point made by the Under Secretary 

of Defense for Personnel and Readiness that DOD is in the early stages of its strategic 

planning efforts. We believe that DOD has made progress in establishing a 

foundation for strategically addressing civilian human capital issues by developing its 

departmentwide civilian human capital strategic plan. Opportunities exist, however, 

to strengthen the planning efforts. Our March 2003 report and its recommendations 

should be viewed in that light. 

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional committees; the 

Secretary of Defense; the Secretaries of the Air Force, Army, and Navy; the 

Commandant of the Marine Corps; and the Directors of the Defense Contract 

Management Agency and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service. We will also 

make copies available to others upon request. In addition, this report will be available 

at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please contact me at 

(202) 512-5559 or Christine Fossett at (202) 512-2956. 

Sincerely yours, 

Derek B. Stewart 

Director, Defense Capabilities 

and Management 

Enclosure 
6 GAO-03-690R DOD Personnel

Enclosure I 

Comments from the Department of Defense 
7 GAO-03-690R DOD Personnel
8 GAO-03-690R DOD Personnel

(350366) 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of 

Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities 

and to help improve the performance and accountability of the federal 

government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; 

evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, 

recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed 

oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government 

is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is 

through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older 

products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents 

using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety, 

including charts and other graphics. 

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site 

daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail 

this list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily 

E-mail alert for newly released products” under the GAO Reports heading. 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. A 

check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Documents. 

GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a 

single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to: 

U.S. General Accounting Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Public Affairs